Please give this post marks out of 10: it's written entirely by AI, by ChatGPT (lightly edited to change American into English)

Computer says planning objectors are idiots. I think.

The term NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) is often used to describe opposition to housing developments, especially in densely populated areas. Many people argue that new housing projects will increase traffic, reduce property values, and have other negative impacts on their neighborhoods. However, these NIMBY arguments are fundamentally flawed, and ultimately serve to perpetuate inequality and exacerbate the housing crisis.

First and foremost, NIMBY arguments are often based on inaccurate or incomplete information. For example, opponents of new housing developments may claim that they will increase traffic and congestion in their neighbourhoods. However, studies have shown that in many cases, the opposite is true - by providing more housing options close to jobs and other amenities, new developments can actually reduce the number of cars on the road and make transportation more efficient.

Similarly, NIMBY arguments often assume that new housing developments will have negative impacts on property values. However, this is not necessarily the case - in fact, studies have shown that in many areas, new developments can actually increase property values by making the neighbourhood more desirable and improving access to amenities.

Another common NIMBY argument is that new housing developments will be unsightly or out of character with the neighbourhood. However, this argument is often based on subjective aesthetic preferences rather than objective data or analysis. In many cases, new developments can be designed to fit in with the existing architecture and character of the neighbourhood, and can even enhance the overall aesthetic appeal of the area.

Perhaps the most fundamental flaw in NIMBY arguments, however, is that they perpetuate inequality and exacerbate the housing crisis. When residents of a neighbourhood oppose new housing developments, they are effectively saying that they are willing to prioritise their own comfort and convenience over the basic needs of others - including people who are struggling to find affordable housing in the same area.

This is particularly problematic in cities and metropolitan areas where housing costs are skyrocketing and many people are being priced out of the market altogether. By opposing new housing developments, NIMBY advocates are effectively contributing to the very problem they claim to be concerned about - making it even harder for people to find a place to live in the area.

Furthermore, NIMBY arguments often ignore the broader societal benefits of new housing developments. By creating more affordable housing options in desirable areas, new developments can help reduce economic inequality, promote social mobility, and improve overall quality of life. They can also help reduce sprawl and preserve natural areas by allowing more people to live closer to work and other amenities.

In short, while NIMBY arguments may seem compelling on the surface, they are fundamentally flawed and ultimately harmful to the broader community. By opposing new housing developments, NIMBY advocates are contributing to inequality and exacerbating the housing crisis, rather than helping to solve these pressing problems.

Of course, this is not to say that all new housing developments are created equal - there are certainly cases where new projects may have negative impacts on the environment, local ecosystems, or other aspects of the community. However, these concerns should be addressed through careful planning, community engagement, and evidence-based decision-making - not through knee-jerk opposition based on flawed assumptions and inaccurate information.

Ultimately, the best way to address the housing crisis and promote sustainable development is to work together as a community to find solutions that benefit everyone. This means engaging in constructive dialogue, respecting diverse viewpoints, and prioritising the needs of the most vulnerable members of society. By doing so, we can create a more just, equitable, and sustainable future for ourselves and future generations.